Re: [PATCH] [v3] i2c: imx-lpi2c: Fix runtime PM imbalance on error

2020-06-15 Thread Wolfram Sang
On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 06:33:40AM +, Aisheng Dong wrote: > > From: Wolfram Sang > > Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2020 5:12 PM > > > > On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 02:16:40PM +0800, Dinghao Liu wrote: > > > pm_runtime_get_sync() increments the runtime PM usage counter even the > > > call returns an

RE: [PATCH] [v3] i2c: imx-lpi2c: Fix runtime PM imbalance on error

2020-06-15 Thread Aisheng Dong
> From: Wolfram Sang > Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2020 5:12 PM > > On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 02:16:40PM +0800, Dinghao Liu wrote: > > pm_runtime_get_sync() increments the runtime PM usage counter even the > > call returns an error code. Thus a corresponding decrement is needed > > on the error

Re: Re: [PATCH] [v3] i2c: imx-lpi2c: Fix runtime PM imbalance on error

2020-06-14 Thread dinghao . liu
> > Can you point me to a discussion where it was decided that this is a > proper fix? I'd think we rather should fix pm_runtime_get_sync() but > maybe there are technical reasons against it. > There is a discussion here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/5/20/1100 There are many use cases that

Re: [PATCH] [v3] i2c: imx-lpi2c: Fix runtime PM imbalance on error

2020-06-14 Thread Wolfram Sang
On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 02:16:40PM +0800, Dinghao Liu wrote: > pm_runtime_get_sync() increments the runtime PM usage counter even > the call returns an error code. Thus a corresponding decrement is > needed on the error handling path to keep the counter balanced. Can you point me to a discussion